Post Match Leicester 2 Blackpool 0

[Profondo Rosso]

I know what you mean, Hazzman.

He's not the type of player I thought he'd be at all when we signed him. I thought he'd be a brave, tough tackling, no nonsense stopper who is great in the air and a great communicator in the Walsh/Elliott/Taggart mould but he's not that kind of player at all from what I can see of him.

Seems to be more someone who just waits for the ball to come to him and then deals with it. Doesn't seem to make much of an effort to "attack" or "dive in" to the ball in the way those mentioned did (or the way Bamba attacks the ball when it's in the air) either on the ground or in the air.

Not saying anything about his ability or whether that's right or wrong, but I just find myself scratching my head when I see people comparing him to Walsh (in terms of playing style) or calling him a brave (don't want to start that debate again, but you know what I mean) and tough tackling, non nonsense player. I must be watching an entirely different player, because I don't see that style of play from him at all.

 

[Han]

Maybe I didn't say that in the right way....

When he started he was a complete waste of space and I wanted him out, but now I am growing more confident in him with each game. He defended very well. The distribution needs some work but how many championship defenders are actually that good at playing 50-yard passes? It seems to be a common, easy complaint for all centre backs.

Saying that he played badly but defended well is just like saying Gally was shite against Palace apart from the two screamers.

 

[Profondo Rosso]

Saying that he played badly but defended well is just like saying Gally was shite against Palace apart from the two screamers.

No, it's not. If Gallagher had given Crystal Palace 2 goals then you may have had a point. If it was Mills who was stopping everything, including the the times he gave the ball away you may have a point, but often it was his fellow defenders who had to stop the attacks which he had caused by him needlessly giving the ball back to Blackpool.

Besides, I never said he defended well, I said he was fine defensively. He was hardly great, but he didn't cause us any real problems with his defending, as he did his passing, which put us under pressure on several occasions and his fellow defenders, particularly the two full-backs, had to dig him out of it on several occasions too.

As said, I think it was simply a case of him having a poor game against Blackpool that's all. He's been much better than that for us this season.

 

[indierich06]

Well I think if anyone can get the best out of him, it'll be Pearson. He obviously rates Mills as he's started him in all games so far and must see something there. Hopefully he can do with Mills what he did with Jack Hobbs.

 

[Profondo Rosso]

Yep, let's hope you are right! He's shown at times he can be a good defender this season, but he's just been far too inconsistent. Hopefully NP can get him to be a lot more consistent.

 

[tedfoxxx]

I'd like to see a Bamba/St Ledger partnership given a proper go, just that Mills is club captain so it probably makes it difficult for Nige to drop him.

 

[Miles Away]

When Mills plays we don't concede many goals.

 

[DesertFox]

It does...though I feel this is incomplete data.

To clarify: I like ALL tits. Data complete.

 

[tedfoxxx]

When Mills plays we don't concede many goals.

True dat.

 

[Cate Fox]

To clarify: I like ALL tits. Data complete.

even moobs? :icon_eek:

 

[spionfox]

Mills is club captain so it probably makes it difficult for Nige to drop him.

I'd love to hear Stringer ask him if that was the case :icon_lol:

 

[Mattmeister]

even moobs? :icon_eek:

Spaniel's ears?

 

[ChrisFilter]

A poppy? Glorification of war?

What are you on?

Ha I thought that'd go down well.

What I said was no more ridiculous than calling the woman in the bank a fundamentalist.

Let's say this woman had family killed by British soldiers. Wouldn't it be fair enough for her to want to avoid anything that glorifies British soldiers? It doesn't mean she's a religious fundamentalist. She could just be a victim of our shitty foreign policy.

She could just be a bigot, of course, but then she'd be in good company.

 

[spionfox]

Ha I thought that'd go down well.

What I said was no more ridiculous than calling the woman in the bank a fundamentalist.

Let's say this woman had family killed by British soldiers. Wouldn't it be fair enough for her to want to avoid anything that glorifies British soldiers? It doesn't mean she's a religious fundamentalist. She could just be a victim of our shitty foreign policy.

She could just be a bigot, of course, but then she'd be in good company.

So now you are suggesting that a poppy 'glorifies' British soldiers.

Have a word with yourself.

Amazing.

 

[Blue Maniac]

Ha I thought that'd go down well.

What I said was no more ridiculous than calling the woman in the bank a fundamentalist.

Let's say this woman had family killed by British soldiers. Wouldn't it be fair enough for her to want to avoid anything that glorifies British soldiers? It doesn't mean she's a religious fundamentalist. She could just be a victim of our shitty foreign policy.

She could just be a bigot, of course, but then she'd be in good company.

Are you for real?

 

[Macky]

What I said was no more ridiculous than calling the woman in the bank a fundamentalist.

If the story had involved a ham sandwich, as I thought, then describing her as a fundamentalist wouldn't be ridiculous at all.

She could just be a bigot, of course, but then she'd be in good company.

In whose company? In the bank?

 

[ChrisFilter]

So now you are suggesting that a poppy 'glorifies' British soldiers.

Have a word with yourself.

Amazing.

How does it not?! Don't get me wrong, I'm not anti-poppy nor a white poppy wearer, but of course it glorifies British soldiers.

 

[ChrisFilter]

Are you for real?

Yeah. What bit of what I'm saying do you take issue with? I'm playing devil's advocate, obviously, but my point is perfectly valid.

 

[ChrisFilter]

If the story had involved a ham sandwich, as I thought, then describing her as a fundamentalist wouldn't be ridiculous at all.

In whose company? In the bank?

I'm talking about the woman in the bank, not the sandwich racist.

We live in a country full of Daily Mail readers. The bank woman sounds like the Muslim equivalent.

 

[Macky]

I'm talking about the woman in the bank, not the sandwich racist.

Racist?